You asked a question about RCC doctrine, and reception of either "kind" as being sufficient for receiving the fullness of the sacrament of Holy Communion.
Unless things have changed dramatically in the Roman world, the "official" position is still that the laity receive only the bread that has been blessed (OK, transubstantiated!); and only the clergy receive in both kinds. I know there are churches, and probably even dioceses, where everyone receives both bread and wine; but this is not (or, at least, has not been) the normative practice for the RCC.
Having read the report, my first thought was that this would certainly be the avenue I would pursue if someone with the inability to tolerate gluten wanted to receive the Mysteries at our parish. I do note that this option was offered to the child; but it was rejected. Talk about wanting to have things your own way!
Which raises an interesting point: How was this "change" explained to the people in the pews? "Well, yes, yesterday, you weren't allowed to have the wine; but as of today, you are allowed."
I never did understand why the RCC communicated the laity only with the Body of Christ. (I was never RC.)
Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion Under Both Kinds in the Dioceses of the United States of America was approved by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops on June 14, 2001. In part, it provides (in para. 15), "Clearly there are some pastoral circumstances that require eucharistic sharing in one species only, such as when Communion is brought to the sick or when one is unable to receive either the Body of the Lord or the Precious Blood due to an illness." (Emphasis added.) Wouldn't that apply here, with regard to the young girl with sprue-celiac disease?
Anyway, it's situations such as this that a part of the reason why I'm so glad to be an Orthodox Christian...
Anonymous said…
We have actually faced this problem in our parish. There are two of us (unrelated) who are gluten intolerant (not as severe as celiac). Our priest asked and was told that we could partake of just the wine if necessary. I don't understand why the girl's family is refusing this perfectly obvious option. According to the story it was offered. Certainly, she had to refuse the low-gluten option, but no mention was made of a response to the second choice. My personal opinion is that the mother is on a crusade. Understandable from an American point of view I suppose, but hardly fair to her daughter and not particularly good press for the church either, IMO.
It is interesting that somebody brought the story to the press. To what end? They believe that their church will bow to public opinion? Public opinion that falls mostly outside of their church's communicants.
From other things I've heard there are some parishes where questionable things are being used for the bread and wine (other ingredients in the bread or some other kind of wine).
Comments
Unless things have changed dramatically in the Roman world, the "official" position is still that the laity receive only the bread that has been blessed (OK, transubstantiated!); and only the clergy receive in both kinds. I know there are churches, and probably even dioceses, where everyone receives both bread and wine; but this is not (or, at least, has not been) the normative practice for the RCC.
Having read the report, my first thought was that this would certainly be the avenue I would pursue if someone with the inability to tolerate gluten wanted to receive the Mysteries at our parish. I do note that this option was offered to the child; but it was rejected. Talk about wanting to have things your own way!
I never did understand why the RCC communicated the laity only with the Body of Christ. (I was never RC.)
Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion
Under Both Kinds in the Dioceses of the United States of America was approved by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops on June 14, 2001. In part, it provides (in para. 15), "Clearly there are some pastoral circumstances that require eucharistic sharing in one species only, such as when Communion is brought to the sick or when one is unable to receive either the Body of the Lord or the Precious Blood due to an illness." (Emphasis added.) Wouldn't that apply here, with regard to the young girl with sprue-celiac disease?
Anyway, it's situations such as this that a part of the reason why I'm so glad to be an Orthodox Christian...
Tabitha
Hopefully not.